Slashdot Mirror
U.S. To Drop Charges Against Sklyarov
Schmerd writes: "The New York Times has a story saying that charges will be dropped against Dmitry Sklyarov in exchange for his testimony against his employer ElcomSoft." Si adds: "It looks like Dmitri might be home for Christmas. This is not the end of the trial, but it appears Dmitri has been freed, pending certain stipulations." jij adds this breaking news article on the Associated Press wire as well. (The AP story is also at Wired). Update: 12/13 22:23 GMT by T : sam@caveman.org links to a slightly more in-depth AP report at the Seattle Post-Intelligencer.
I mean, this is great for Dimitry, but it seemed like a perfect case to test the DMCA against the First Amendment.
Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
Is this really a positive step? Wouldn't it have been better to have the law struck down in court as unconstitutional?
Of course, it's definitely better for Dmitry.
Twoflower
--
Twoflower
If I've read the articles correctly, Dmitri does not have to testify against ElcomSoft. He just has to testify, whether for or against, it doesn't make a difference.
You poor, deluded, naive little boy.
How exactly is forcing him to rat out his boss in return for being let out of jail (where he has been rotting for months, by your OWN admission) correcting a mistake?
It is if his testimony is "No, we never did that. Why do you ask?"
--
Twoflower
In today's agreement, Dmitry will be required to testify for the government and ElcomSoft expects him to testify for their case as well. The story Dmitry has to tell is exactly the same regardless of which side calls him to testify. Dmitry's story has not changed since that day in July, when the FBI arrested him in Las Vegas, and he is quite happy to tell his story again and again, if need be.
- from the planetpdf article
To say that he is going to testify "against" his employer seems to be a bit much. The various articles say that he will testify and that it is unsure which side will call him first.
[waldo@tux]$ whois freesklyarov.org
AgentZero Technologies
955 Massachusetts Ave #130
Cambridge, MA 02139
US
Domain Name: FREESKLYAROV.ORG
Record last updated on 13-Dec-2001.
Record expires on 18-Jul-2002.
[waldo@tux]$ whois freedsklyarov.org
No match for domain "FREEDSKLYAROV.ORG".
Hmm...
-Waldo Jaquith
The Times carried the AP wire. Wired carried the AP wire. You also linked to the AP directly. Don't the editors read before they publish? They're all the same!
If you look at the facts this is a good deal for everyone.
Dmitri gets to go home.
He gets to testify about writing a legal program in Russia.
The DMCA test case becomes US vs ElcomSoft.
Unfortunately, I doubt the chilling effect on presenting scientific/research papers will get explored. Although he would be able to persue a judgement like Felton went for and not get it thrown out like his was.
-Jerry
The DMCA still will be tried, and may or may not withstand judgement. However, no single person is getting the shaft from the long arm of the law which will help make this much easier on everyone involved on the defensive end.
...
Let him testify, my guess is his testimonial will serve ElcomSoft better in defense.
... So, if he weighs the same as a duck
Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
I for one am happy to know he is free to be seeing his wife and children; I know if I were kept a long time from my soon-to-be-husband Yves for a great part of a year, I would do anything to see him again, and I think you would too.
Sincerely yours,
Chloë
had better be willing to go to jail for his beliefs, in Russia, for an indefinite amount of time. Because otherwise, stfu.
The article states Dmitry lives in San Mateo with his wife and 2 kids. Did that change since the trial and he decided that he really did like the good ol' USA?
/. reviewing of facts was bad.. geez.
At least they put on that Defcon was about hacking, you wouldn't want people to actually know it is a security conference that a lot of legitimate people speak and learn at.
I thought
Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
Religion: 57% of the population is Christian with 1% being Protestant. 33% of the population is non-religious and less than 9% of the population is Muslim.
Most "non-religious" people in predominantly Christian countries celebrate Christmas as well, so it's a pretty good bet.
The fact that it was a good test case is probably amoung the foremost of the reasons it was dropped.
Say what you will about evil crackers and hackers who restlessly violate people's property. Dmitry was obviously not one of these people. He wrote a tool to do something that is still quite legal in Russia, and is considered to be quite a scholar and expert by many. Any competent lawyer would have been able to present him as such. He would have a huge chance of getting
The U.S. has zero chance to uphold the DMCA unless they get precident behind it that come from using it to prosecute someone who they can present as having evil purposes... such as any of the alleged DoD crackers arrested this week.
As long as the people who get involved in lawsuits are fairly upstanding individuals, they can't afford to prosecute. Once they come across someone who would probably be sent up the river even without the DMCA, then they'll prosecute.
Just watch...
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
I doubt that the DMCA will ever be tested in the US Supreme Court, especially in a criminal case. The corporations who put the law in place won't risk lost profits by letting the DMCA be test against the Constitution at the highest level. They will continue to beat people (and small companies) with it, then they will either get the case dropped or thrown out.
There is something severely wrong with the check and balances system of the US Gov't. Laws don't have to be constitutional to be passed. Corporations (or AG Ashcroft) just have to keep the nconstituional laws from being tested all the way up to the SC. What we really need is a judiciary review of new laws (before they go into effect) which pits them against the constitution.
-JungleBoy
"You never know when some crazed rodent with cold feet might be running loose in your pants."
-Calvin
"...Joe Burton, lead attorney for ElcomSoft, reacted to today's outcome saying "I want to make a statement on behalf of ElcomSoft, my client -- Both my client and I have, since the beginning of this case, maintained Dmitry's innocence on any and all criminal activity. From day-one of the arrest ElcomSoft has been willing to have the Government proceed against them and NOT Dmitry. Burton further states "you may remember that ElcomSoft offered to take Dmitry's place and substitute the company as the sole defendant in this case -- The company knows that neither Dmitry nor they committed any criminal acts and believes that in the end, they will be found innocent of any and all charges the U.S. Government is bringing against them as well...."
you know, this guy has a real class act employer.
"the best safety of the frontier...will be secured by total annihilation of the few remaining indians" L Frank Baum 1890
It makes you wonder...
Go Lakers!
Free at last.
We can make whatever political statement we like about the American laws he may or may not have broken.
But I'm pretty sure he's going to be happy to go home to Russia and see his wife and children.
You know, Russia. Where he's safe from government persecution.
...a la the Damian Conway purchase. Anyone in the right place to set up a little "hey, sorry our country hassled you, here's something for your trouble" fund? Or am I just being naieve thinking, well, among other things, that I can spell naieve?
Liberty uber alles.
What does it matter if he testifies against his company? The US can't do a darn thing to them since they aren't in this country. Look at the DeBeers monopoly. Diamonds aren't rare at all, but DeBeers made some strategic agreements with countries to keep most of the supply locked up. Now the DeBeers executives will be arrested if they ever enter this country. That judgement hasn't done a darn thing. DeBeers still operates and so will ElmComsoft(SP?). I think it's just the justice department's way of saying, "Yeah, it's a stupid law, but we'd look stupid if we just let you go, so we're going to ask you to do something stupid so we can save face."
*Condense fact from the vapor of nuance*
He should be able to sue for something. Damned if I can think what, though.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I don't live in CA and couldn't get there anyway but why don't all the people who protested for him through a party in his honor before he goes home. Show him that not all Americans are jackasses and celebrate his freedom at the same time. Obviously he'd rather go home to his wife and kids but the party could easily be before he is allowed to leave California, it would at least lighten up the time before he gets to go home.
"A witty saying proves nothing." - Voltaire
This story probably wont generate a slashdotting, in some part because of the number of different sites linked to.
But somebody always has to complain about something then, dont they.
for some reason, the wired print version has more info, including this bit:
i have to say, i'm very impressed with ElComSoft's generally enlightened attitude.wouldn't it be ironic if a russian company played a role in freeing america from an unjust law?
This is the voice of World Control. I bring you Peace.
When your wife, kids, and life are in Russia, and you don't have a choice about leaving, yeah, it does suck.
Disclaimer, I'm a Californian, and wouldn't live anywhere else... but that's *MY* choice, not the DOJ's to make.
Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
It's called the first amendment. Free speech in Perl should be as protected as free speech in French. Can anyone honestly say, "It should be legal to tell someone how to make a pipe bomb but not how to decrypt a DVD" with a straight face?
I would be first in line to purchase it.
"There ought to be limits to freedom"
This farce, was ill conceived. The program was written in Russia. It was not against the law there, but US douchebags thought they would make a "statement". How pathetic are US anyway? Back-ups of software for archival purposes have been legal for years. Was everyone asleep at the wheel on this one? Shit, I am embarrassed at being an American. "Slick Happens"
Are they legally allowed to wait until someone breaks the DMCA "a lot" ??
I know.. I know.. legal questions and slashdot shouldn't mix, but I'm curious
By that peculiar logic, Hollywood should be jailed and locked up by DEMOSTRATING how to hijack airplanes. I would say that is more appropriate example of DEMOSTRATING, than giving a talk.
Say what you want about legality. The whole point is that this piece of legality is immoral, unconstitutional.
If anyone is interested in exactly what this program is and what it does. Here is the trial version produced by ElcomSoft. They had to strip it from their site. But here is the URL for the download. I would suggest version 2.2. Version 2.2 decrypts %25 of the e-book. The full version was originally sold for $99.
It will be interesting to see if anyone will hack this version and make it able to decrypt %100 of the E-Book.
http://diddl.firehead.org/censor/adobe_ebook/
--------------------------
Is this a sig?
--------------------------
How is this selling out, and why would it be a bad thing? His duty to his employer doesn't extend to concealing any illegal activities the employer may have committed.
He was out of jail, but not out of the proverbial frying pan. He couldn't leave, and he could still have been convicted and stuck in jail later.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Dmitry goes home (deserved) but has to give testimony of hiy employer. The case is not dismissed, will go against Elkomsoft. The US Justice will find or construct enough evidence to win the case. It offers Elkomsoft to drop charged in exchange for know-how and services in terms of password cracking and deciphering systems. If they don't they shatter the company.
Might just happen. Maybe not. Who knows, but it sure is a scary thought.
+++ath0
This is fantastic news for Sklyarov, personaly. And I for one am glad to see this played out on the more traditional copyright battlefeilds... between companies without worrying about anyone going to jail. Not to mention against people in another country as well. So unless Russia agrees to extradite these people not to much can happen to them, other then having their US (and possibly other WIPO nations) frozen.
But ultimately, this is still a loss for our freedoms and everything. Adobe had to consider the public outcry in the computer world. The Hollywood conglomerates won't. The US DOJ still proved that they're willing to go out and do 'the real thing' against individual programmers. And there was no legal victory for the EEF or any of the anti-DMCA people (not that I think Sklyarov should have martyred himself). Hopefully we'll be able to get the thing overturned, but it's going to be harder to defend a Russian company with the lead programmer testifying against them, then the sympathetic coder with a family back home.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
ElComSoft's chief executive, Alex Katalov, said he was pleased that the company, not Sklyarov, would bear sole responsibility for the charges.
Hands down, Mr. Katalov is the coolest employer I've ever seen. Since Dmitry's arrest, he had been front-and-center, doing what it took to get Dmitry free regardless of the risk. Thomas C. Greene raised this issue in an article in The Register a while back and it got my attention. But I am very impressed that he continued to put responsibility on his company when Dmitry would have provided a convenient scapegoat.
concealing any illegal activities the employer may have committed.
The question about legality is the not simple as what they are accused of is n9t illegal in Russland. How would you feel if your caompny was charged with something say illegal in Saudi like selling alcohol and then had to go to jail . testify on the Henious nature of booze?
Help fight continental drift.
There is a big difference. Deffered is kind of like probation. "Do this for this long and we will remove the charges completely..If you don't the full charges will be reinstated and since we now have your confession your goose is cooked". This is often used to allow the prosecution to "drop" charges while saving face. Sometimes used to gain testimony, sometimes to force the person to adhere to certain conditions and often used to give a win-win spin to the case. "he did technically break the law, but we see no need to prosecute...blah..blah ...blah...
From The US Attorneys Office
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 13, 2001
The United States Attorney's Office for the Northern District of California announced that Dmitry Sklyarov entered into an agreement this morning with the United States and admitted his conduct in a hearing before U.S. District Judge Whyte in San Jose Federal Court.
Under the agreement, Mr. Sklyarov agreed to cooperate with the United States in its ongoing prosecution of Mr. Sklyarov's former employer, Elcomsoft Co., Ltd. Mr. Skylarov will be required to appear at trial and testify truthfully, and he will be deposed in the matter. For its part, the United States agreed to defer prosecution of Mr. Sklyarov until the conclusion of the case against Elcomsoft or for one year, whichever is longer. Mr. Sklyarov will be permitted to return to Russia in the meantime, but will be subject to the Court's supervision, including regularly reporting by telephone to the Pretrial Services Department. Mr. Sklyarov will be prohibited from violating any laws during the year, including copyright laws. The United States agreed that, if Mr. Sklyarov successfully completes the obligations in the agreement, it will dismiss the charges pending against him at the end of the year or when the case against Elcomsoft is complete.
Mr. Sklyarov, 27, of Moscow, Russia, was indicted by a federal Grand Jury on August 28, 2001. He was charged with one count of conspiracy in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 371, and two counts of trafficking for gain in technology primarily designed to circumvent technology that protects a right of a copyright owner in violation of Title 17, United States Code, Section 1201(b)(1)(A), and two counts of trafficking for gain in technology marketed for use in circumventing technology that protects a right of a copyright owner in violation of Title 17, United States Code, Section 1201(b)(1)(A).
In entering into the agreement with the government, Mr. Sklyarov was required to acknowledge his conduct in the offense. In the agreement, Mr. Sklyarov made the following admissions, which he also confirmed in federal court today:
"Beginning on a date prior to June 20, 2001, and continuing through July 15, 2001, I was employed by the Russian software company, Elcomsoft Co. Ltd. (also known as Elcom Ltd.) (hereinafter "Elcomsoft") as a computer programmer and cryptanalyst.
"Prior to June 20, 2001, I was aware Adobe Systems, Inc. ("Adobe") was a software company in the United States. I was also aware Adobe was the creator of the Adobe Portable Document Format ("PDF"), a computer file format for the publication and distribution of electronic documents. Prior to June 20, 2001, I knew Adobe distributed a program titled the Adobe Acrobat eBook Reader that provided technology for the reading of documents in an electronic format on personal computers. Prior to June 20, 2001, I was aware that documents distributed in the Adobe Acrobat eBook Reader format are PDF files and that specifications of PDF allow for limiting of certain operations, such as opening, editing, printing, or annotating.
"Prior to June 20, 2001, as a part of my dissertation work and as part of my employment with Elcomsoft, I wrote a part of computer program titled the Advanced eBook Processor ("AEBPR"). I developed AEBPR as a practical application of my research for my dissertation and in order to demonstrate weaknesses in protection methods of PDF files. The only use of the AEBPR is to create an unprotected copy of an electronic document. Once a PDF file is decrypted with the AEBPR, a copy is no longer protected by encryption. This is all the AEBPR program does.
"Prior to June 20, 2001, I believed that ElcomSoft planned to post the AEBPR program on the Internet on the company's website www.elcomsoft.com. I believed that the company would charge a fee for a license for the full version of the AEBPR that would allow access to all capabilities of the program.
"After Adobe released a new version of the Adobe Acrobat eBook Reader that prevented the initial version of the AEBPR program from removing the limitations or restrictions on an e-book, I wrote software revisions for a new version of the AEBPR program. The new version again decrypted the e-document to which it was applied. The version of this new AEBPR program offered on the Elcomsoft website only decrypted a portion of an e-document to which it was applied, unless the user had already purchased a fully functional version of the earlier version and had both versions installed on the same machine. The new version was developed after June 29, 2001. At that time, Elcomsoft had already stopped selling the program. The version of this new program offered on the Elcomsoft website did not provide a user with an opportunity to purchase it or convert it to a fully functional one, and was developed as a matter of competition.
"On July 15, 2001, as part of my employment with Elcomsoft, I attended the DEF CON Nine conference in Las Vegas, Nevada. At the conference I made a presentation originally intended for the BlackHat conference that immediately preceded the DefCon Nine in July 2001 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The same group of people organizes both BlackHat and DefCon Nine. Since there was no available slot for a presentation at BlackHat at the time when the paper was sent for the committee consideration, the organizers of both conferences suggested that the paper be presented at the DefCon rather than at BlackHat. The paper that I read at DefCon is attached as Exhibit A. A principal part of my presentation is comprised of my research for the dissertation. In my presentation when I said "we", I meant Elcomsoft."
Mr. Sklyarov's employer, Elcomsoft, remains charged in the case, and the Court in that matter has set hearings for various motions on March 4, 2002, and April 1, 2002.
The prosecution of Elcomsoft is the result of an investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Scott Frewing and Joseph Sullivan of the Computer Hacking and Intellectual Property ("CHIP") Unit are the Assistant U.S. Attorneys who are prosecuting the case with the assistance of legal technician Lauri Gomez.
A copy of this press release and key court documents filed in the case may also be found on the U.S. Attorney's Office's website at www.usdoj.gov/usao/can <http://www.usaondca.com>.
All press inquiries to the U.S. Attorney's Office should be directed to Assistant U.S. Attorney Matthew J. Jacobs at (415)436-7181 or Assistant U.S. Attorney Ross Nadel, Chief of the CHIP Unit, in San Jose...
Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
From the US attorneys office of North California and their press release.
:-?
"For its part, the United States agreed to defer prosecution of Mr. Sklyarov until the conclusion of the case against Elcomsoft or for one year, whichever is longer."
Er, so that means the case is not dropped just deferred, but they aren't going to prosecute him until the case against Elcomsoft is resolved.
Mr. Sklyarov will be prohibited from violating any laws during the year, including copyright laws.
Er, so he doesn't get special permission to break laws ?
"Elcomsoft, remains charged in the case, and the Court in that matter has set hearings for various motions on March 4, 2002, and April 1, 2002."
I don't think this case will get resolved for _years_. There's not that much of a dispute about what actually happened, it's just the interpretation of whether it's illegal or not....and it seems that the US government don't want to see this case resolved quickly, and so it isn't going to be sped through the courts or through the appeals.
Hey, does that mean that my Free Sklyarov T-shirt is now a collectors item ?
"Free software as in beer, copy protection as in racket" - Telsa Gwynne
As far as I understand it, he was released on bail for a while. Unless he was under 24h surveilance he could have easily made it to Mexico or Canada at which point he could have caught a plane to Russia.
I'm sure it's all very illegal to do that, but really, who cares? It's just a US court charging him with a US law, paid for by US corps.
Once he made it home to Russia I would imagine he'd be hard to extradite. He might never be able to travel to the US again, but that's not really a big drawback, especially for him... I doubt even if all charges were dropped tomorrow (with no conditions) that he'd ever come back willingly.
So, why not just skip the country? It's painfully obvious that he has no moral reason to stay and suffer punishment.
Is it a matter of difficulty? I've never (before Sept 11, at any rate) had any problem crossing the US/Canada or US/Mexico border. (I assume that's a skin-color related difficulty, and mostly when coming *from* mexico.)
I sure as hell wouldn't stick around, risking 20 years (or more) in prison in a foreign country when I could flee to my home country where everyone agreed that I hadn't committed a crime.
no no, they are just saying testify because it is assumed that it will be on the DOJ side. he is making the deal with them, so he is going to be their witness...................
:-p
Of cource, this is the same DOJ that let MS off the hok after having they had the company's face ground into the pavment, so I guess anything is possable
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
What are you, on crack?
He's available to testify for either side. He hasn't changed his story since the day of the arrest.
In what universe is he a rat?
normal(adj)- people who don't sit on slashdot all day wondering why everyone else isn't building robots [DECS]
Actually this is probably a sign of things getting back to normal: a Dimitry Sklyarov story and a Gary Condit story running in the same week.
Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
It's funny because this situation illustrates it extremely well.
On the one hand, there's the Big Bad Microsoft, hand in hand with all the content providers, all wanting to narrow what people can do with the "digital content" they buy. As someone who loves music (fortunately, the kind that doesn't sell that much and can be bought at used cd stores for very little) I find the thought of not being able to rip the cd's to my laptop (so I can listen to whatever I feel like listening to without having to carry a bunch of cd's from one place to another), disturbing. If I paid for the thing, I should be able to do what I wanted with it, shouldn't I? I'm revolted at the degree of selfishness and greed that's taking over content producers, and while I understand that they have an obligation to the shareholders and owners, I find it very sadening to see that the maximization of profits leads to so much trampling of other freedoms.
On the other hand, there's this whole bunch of people, in their rightful indignation, ready to take arms against the enemy. You know, it's kind of funny the way we end up being so concerned about some things and not at all concerned about others. In fact, this could be a great way to stop watching so many movies, or to stop hearing so much music, or even to stop being so much time at the computer. The problem here is that we are getting so attached to these virtual fixes that the ones that provide them will (obviously) look for way of earning more from it. Doesn't it say so much about our present condition?
Everyone's loving things more (and probably using people more). So why don't we stop? There's such a big world out there (and a real one, for that matter), so many opportunities to have a life, so many things to do... I can say for sure that I would like to learn a lot of stuff, read a whole ton of other stuff, and to be a lot more sociable than what I currently am.
And, you know what? If people stopped caring so much with the small things, the ones that produce them probably wouldn't be so busy trying to rip everyone off...
Strange world that in which we live...
However, his talk was a detailed explanation on how to circumvent ebook encryption, and under the DMCA that very act is illegal.
Trafficking in a circumvention device is illegal; I'd be quite surprised if giving a talk about was-- even a Congressman can figure out that a prior restraint law would get smacked down real fast. Do you happen to have a passage in mind that would make the action you described illegal?
Hmmm. Not good. This reeks strongly of "This is your confession. Sign here, please."
The wording appears to be trying to paint Dmitry and ElcomSoft in as damning a light as possible (which, let's face it, isn't very, except when viewed vs. the DMCA).
I find it difficult to imagine that he came out with that on his own without it somehow being prompted or, worse yet, ghost written. What I don't find it difficult to imagine is that this may have been his only chance of seeing his wife and children on any kind of semi-permanent basis.
The worst thing is that the government is reserving the right to place him on trial (or should I say back on trial) any time a year or more from now. They have not said they'll definitely be dropping charges against him. I can easily forsee a situation where, in a year or once the ElcomSoft trial is over, the government could cobble together some explanation of how Dmitry didn't meet his "obligations" and place him back on trial.
I had hoped our government wouldn't be resorting to this kind of tactic. It's beginning to get to the point where I'm actually ashamed to call myself a citizen here.
From the sound of the AP article, testifying against ElcomSoft isn't really so bad. Whats his testimony going to be? That they produced the program in question? Everybody already knows they did!
The ElComSoft people are pleased with this arangement (quote: ElComSoft's chief executive, Alex Katalov, said he was pleased that the company, not Sklyarov, would bear sole responsibility for the charges), presumably because they are in russia and didn't do anything wrong! (it isn't "wrong" in russia at least)
I think they are asking him for statements "against" ElComSoft so the FBI can pretend to save face and it won't look like they're just letting him go without getting anything in return.
Unless he has some bombshell new info against ElComSoft (which is unlikely), this really is a happy ending after all.
___
The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason. --Ben Franklin
Senators and Congressmen aren't that stupid, nor are Hollywood lobbyists.
My understanding was that it was trafficing in access control circumvention devices he was charged with, and that offense was committed by his employer, and was unrelated to his visit in the US.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
That sums up part of the deal. For one year, he has to not break American law WHILE HE IS LIVING IN RUSSIA.
Is this Pournelle's American Empire at last? Has anyone noticed that the DOJ now claims worldwide powers?
So fast, so fast it's happening...
Does this mean I can buy Photoshop now? Or are they still the scum of the earth? (Second to Microsoft that is.)
www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance
Actually, his employer have recommended this, and from day one wanted to take his place in the legal proceedings.
> you know, this guy has a real class act
> employer.
This "class act employer" is responsible for a good chunk of Internet spam. Elcomsoft makes Advanced Direct Remailer, Advanced Email Extractor and a whole bunch of spam tools. Elcomsoft's web site had been in the MAPS RBL. They still keep selling their spam tools. These guys are crooks and should be put out of business. It just a coincidence that they are appearing in a freedom of speech litigation.
US law seems unpredictable to a scary degree, I for one would never consider relocating to the US due to this. This feeling is certainly shared by many other non-US residents.
When the economy is recovering next time, this may become a problem. To those of you out temporality of work, how about spending your effort changing this situation to the better?
-- From Denmark
Once he's in Russia, there's no way the americans can 'extradite' Dmitry back to the USA. Countries don't extradite their own citizen, perhaps only except in case of an international court of justice (crimes against humanity...), but that's another story.
/jabba
-- It's always darker before it goes pitch black.
This is kinda true. He has to testify as a government witness, but he doesn't have to lie on the stand (which would be illegal anyway :)
In other words, he can say what he likes in response to the questions of the DOJ lawyer, but the DOJ gets to pick the questions.
If this all seems unusually Machiavellian to you, well, it is.
my old sig used to be funny, but then slashcode ate it and now it's not funny anymore
Hmmmm..... So if I, an individual citizen, break the DMCA, I go to jail and pay a very large fine. If I become "Individual Citizen, Inc." and break the DMCA, I don't go to jail and I pay a small fine. The CEOs who wrote the law were smart enough to protect themselves.
Sorry, my bad.